I have to nail everything down in stone, or it is automatically bad, as well. Leaving wiggle room for tuning and balancing is unacceptable.

Additions to EVE are bad, because they would be new stuff.

I don't really have much of a response to this, other than to just outright disagree. I think that something entirely new would shake things up, and hopefully interest people who are bored with the same old stuff. I think that if CCP nails it down properly, it could be balanced, and even iterated, as it can be reset and changed in each incarnation. I think that new stuff can be good.

I know that people will jump on any specific numbers that I state, and use them to find reasons why stuff won't work. And apparently, if I don't cite specific numbers, it's just as bad. If something is new, it is bad. If something is not new, it is boring, and therefore bad. If something is added to EVE, that is bad. If nothing is added to EVE, that is again boring, and bad.

I have to nail everything down in stone, or it is automatically bad, as well. Leaving wiggle room for tuning and balancing is unacceptable.

Additions to EVE are bad, because they would be new stuff.

I don't really have much of a response to this, other than to just outright disagree. I think that something entirely new would shake things up, and hopefully interest people who are bored with the same old stuff. I think that if CCP nails it down properly, it could be balanced, and even iterated, as it can be reset and changed in each incarnation. I think that new stuff can be good.

I know that people will jump on any specific numbers that I state, and use them to find reasons why stuff won't work. And apparently, if I don't cite specific numbers, it's just as bad. If something is new, it is bad. If something is not new, it is boring, and therefore bad. If something is added to EVE, that is bad. If nothing is added to EVE, that is again boring, and bad.

At least CCP gets paid for dealing with this nonsense.

You have a core of a lot of good ideas, Don't let the usual EVE forum "usual suspects" discourage you, if we left it to them, we would have the EVE we have now, and they would continually complain about it.

Keep thinking and Imagining, and passing those Ideas on, they do get seen.

You have a core of a lot of good ideas, Don't let the usual EVE forum "usual suspects" discourage you, if we left it to them, we would have the EVE we have now, and they would continually complain about it.

Keep thinking and Imagining, and passing those Ideas on, they do get seen.

Lol, thanks. I think something like this whole thing would hopefully be self-limiting.

In that, a lot of players simply wouldn't bother, since they'd be down to T1 frigates for a while, AND most of the stuff there is doomed.

But a lot of people could. If the usual suspects couldn't summon up the interest, that would leave the door open for everyone else. And all you're risking is a single, no-implant pod, and your time. Of those things, the most expensive is the time. (well, unless you're taking in super-expensive implants, if so, RIP your ISK. )

That, and prices would fluctuate wildly, people would need a lot of basic materials, and unless they work together more or less, nobody would really get ahead. The new area could see cheap "pirated" blueprints, without screwing up the larger game balancing. Venture-loads of ore could be incredibly valuable to people who are trying to build infrastructure, and money would change hands.

That, and if it fails, it can be reset and retuned, or just scrapped without breaking the rest of the game.

Or... yes, 500 organized people could pwn everything. C'est la vie, but has EVE ever been about making sure all the fights are fair?

Guess it's time for me to start screaming strawman, or something. If you actually read any of my posts, you might realize that's not what I am saying at all. I am not saying that ALL new things are bad. I am saying YOUR new things are bad. Do you understand the difference?

grgjegb gergerg wrote:

I have to nail everything down in stone, or it is automatically bad, as well. Leaving wiggle room for tuning and balancing is unacceptable.

There is no issue with you giving cold, hard stats and then changing them later when it becomes evident that they need changing. CCP does this all the time. The problem is, you're not leaving "wiggle room", you actually have no defined idea at all. Your entire idea is "wiggle room".

Is it one system or are there many? What is this supposed valuable "shiny"? Is it a titan, if so what kind? What kind of structures will you be able to make? How and where do connections between systems appear? What kind of NPC will live in this space? How on earth is CCP supposed to look at this and create something, if even YOU don't know what it is that you are describing.

grgjegb gergerg wrote:

Additions to EVE are bad, because they would be new stuff.

Again, no. Are you suggesting that all additions to EVE are good? Might I suggest then, a new type of space that only specifically I can access, in which I can safely make isk with no fear of being killed because only I can enter it. It is an addition to eve, and it is NEW space! But it's not meant for everyone, just like your idea, but that's OK, because it is new and therefore a good idea by default!

grgjegb gergerg wrote:

I don't really have much of a response to this, other than to just outright disagree

And this, right here, is why your idea will never be even considered by CCP, and never so much as become even an inkling of reality. You are unable to respond to criticism, come up with counter points, or even change your idea slightly to make it more balanced and perhaps, a better idea. Your only response is "Well I think you're wrong".

Good luck convincing anyone other than yourself of your ideas merits with that attitude.

What, you expect me to set everything in stone so someone can find one little part that doesn't work, and then claim the entire idea is trash?

Reading the title is sufficient to call it a trash idea.

When you don't know the difference between there, their, and they're, you come across as being so uneducated that your viewpoint can be safely dismissed. The literate is unlikely to learn much from the illiterate.

Posted - 2017.05.19 17:33:12 -
[36] - Quote
As a simpler method that seems to largely do the same thing or something very similar:

New class of wormhole that only allows corvettes (not frigates) through.

Basically... you can only come through the wormhole in a starter ship.

Yes... you can get in and out easier than your idea. Yes... you can carry whatever you can fit in your corvette cargo hold back and forth from empire. But you still end up with a very disconnected piece of space. You could even create a fixed set of wormholes that don't move to create a system closer to jump gates but without actual... gates. You'd essentially end up with a wormhole "constellation" that can only have stuff removed or brought in in very small quantities.

I'm not sure about the idea itself... but if the idea was accepted it seems like an implementation of that sort would get you pretty close to what you want with only a single tiny addition in terms of mechanics (a wormhole that won't allow anything bigger than corvettes).

As a simpler method that seems to largely do the same thing or something very similar:

New class of wormhole that only allows corvettes (not frigates) through.

Basically... you can only come through the wormhole in a starter ship.

Yes... you can get in and out easier than your idea. Yes... you can carry whatever you can fit in your corvette cargo hold back and forth from empire. But you still end up with a very disconnected piece of space. You could even create a fixed set of wormholes that don't move to create a system closer to jump gates but without actual... gates. You'd essentially end up with a wormhole "constellation" that can only have stuff removed or brought in in very small quantities.

I'm not sure about the idea itself... but if the idea was accepted it seems like an implementation of that sort would get you pretty close to what you want with only a single tiny addition in terms of mechanics (a wormhole that won't allow anything bigger than corvettes).

Congratulations, I think you might be the first person to actually come up with a constructive response lately!

Makes a lot of sense, for getting there. But even if people can carry corvette-loads back, that's a hole, and EVE players basically take ANY hole and run with it. If anything in the new area was unbalanced to make build-up easier, it shouldn't be brought back, so that it can't mess up the main areas.

And of course, none of this should be jumpable by any capitals, except for leaving. Like building a special stargate and using it to jump a built capital out, but this destabilizes every sun in the area. (Hence why it's killed by any pirate, empire, or anyone, in known space.)

As far as linking, I didn't suggest anything, simply because I'm not even sure myself. Like I put in the OP. Having static wormholes between systems, and the ability to build gates sounds nice. That way, you need to build up to scanner frigates to leave a system, and can invade with small ships, but you would need to build actual stargates to send larger ships anywhere.

COPYRIGHT NOTICEEVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.